D. Hayes v. PA BPP
275 C.D. 2016
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Oct 18, 2016Background
- Hayes was sentenced to 1.5–4 years (max date Feb. 3, 2016), paroled July 28, 2014, and signed parole conditions disclaiming credit for time-at-liberty if convicted while on parole.
- Arrested May 1, 2015; bail set May 2, 2015 ($50,000) which he could not post; Parole Board issued a detainer the same day.
- Hayes was held in Delaware County Prison from May 2 to July 30, 2015; he pled guilty July 30, 2015 to drug charges and received credit on the new county sentence for May 2–July 30, 2015.
- Parole Board recommitted Hayes as a convicted parole violator on October 19, 2015, ordering 555 days backtime (the unexpired portion of his original sentence), yielding a recalculated max date of Feb. 4, 2017.
- Hayes administratively appealed, arguing (1) he should receive credit on his original sentence for May 2–July 30, 2015, and (2) the Board lacked authority to impose backtime exceeding the remaining balance of his original term.
Issues
| Issue | Hayes' Argument | Parole Board's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hayes should receive credit on his original sentence for custody May 2–July 30, 2015 | Custody was due to Board detainer; under Davidson he should get credit on original sentence | Custody was due both to Board detainer and inability to post bail; confinement credited to the new sentence | Denied — confinement was not solely on Board detainer; time credited to new sentence, not original |
| Whether the Board may impose backtime that exceeds remaining balance of original unexpired sentence | Board may not impose backtime beyond the unexpired original sentence | Board has authority to recommit a convicted parole violator to serve the remaining maximum and to add street time to recalculate max date | Denied — Board properly recalculated by adding street time (555 days) producing Feb. 4, 2017 |
Key Cases Cited
- Davidson v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 722 A.2d 232 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998) (time held solely on Board detainer is credited to original sentence)
- Gaito v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 412 A.2d 568 (Pa. 1980) (distinguishes credit when custody is solely due to Board detainer vs. inability to post bail)
- Hammonds v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 143 A.3d 994 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2016) (time incarcerated on both new charges and Board detainer applies to the new sentence)
- Knisley v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 362 A.2d 1146 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1976) (Board may recommit convicted parole violator to serve remainder of court-imposed maximum)
- Armbruster v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 919 A.2d 348 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007) (street time is added to original maximum to compute recommitment maximum)
- Pittman v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 131 A.3d 604 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2016) (Board’s discretion governs awarding credit for time at liberty on parole)